Close
4M+
A Month.

Anyone treating this as a last-ditch effort to save a pipeline that's already broken. Anyone who can't deploy the minimum budget. Anyone whose comp structure is under 2 bps, the math won't support the acquisition cost. And anyone who doesn't have a contact sequence and operational follow-up in place. More leads into a broken system just produce bigger losses faster.

The providers you've been buying from, Bankrate, LendingTree, BiggerPockets, CIX, Relip, Kaleidico, and the rest, operate on a shared consent model. They sell the same lead to multiple lenders simultaneously. You're competing against four other people for a borrower who didn't know their information was being resold. My system is built on first-party data. One-to-one consent. Leads that go exclusively to you, under your brand, from an audience of 228,000 verified investors who have a track record of closing deals.

The full non-QM, hard money, and private lending stack. DSCR, both long-term and short-term rental. Bridge loans. Fix and flip. Ground-up construction. Hard money. Investor refi. Bank statement. Asset utilization. 1099. Interest only. Multi-family 2 to 8 unit. Foreign national. Closed-end seconds. Commercial. If you're lending to real estate investors, there's a campaign structure for it.

Yes. And this is one of the most underserved and overlooked segments in the entire lending ad space. Almost nobody is running serious paid acquisition for wholesale and TPO channels in non-QM and private lending. The brokers and correspondent partners are out there, they're active, and they're being ignored by every major lead gen provider. I build dedicated campaigns targeting broker networks, TPO channels, and correspondent relationships, with the same first-party data infrastructure and first click deterrence approach used on the retail side. If you have a wholesale or TPO division and you're not running paid acquisition for it, you are leaving a significant amount of production on the table.

Based on one active client from March 2025 through current, 1,758 leads generated from the verified investor audience: 82.3% came in at 660 credit or higher. 41.6% were $50,000 or more liquid. 88.5% were investment property leads. 52.6% had a purchase price or refinance amount of $250,000 or more. Intent mix: 34.6% purchase, 30.2% cash-out, 24.9% refinance, and 10.2% home equity line. Every lead includes credit range, liquidity range, full property address, and verified contact information.

The structure is a one-time implementation fee to build the campaigns, landing pages, lead capture infrastructure, and targeting. There is no mandatory monthly retainer. Ongoing management is optional and can be structured around performance, relationship stewardship, and funded production. You own the ad account, data, pixels, consent records, and landing pages from day one.

Current average across active clients is 14x. At $8,500 per month in spend, clients are averaging 7 funded units per loan officer per month at an average loan value of $569,000 and 3.05 bps in comp. That produces roughly $121,000 in revenue per month per LO. Those are real numbers from real accounts. I'll show you the actual data on the call.

Most clients are generating qualified leads on day one of launch. From there, funded production depends entirely on your ability to collect loan applications, process them, and move toward closing. Depending on the product, that cycle can run 20 to 30 days. In many cases you will be issuing pre-qualification letters well before a deal closes, those are lines in the water. The pipeline builds fast. The closings follow your operations, not the traffic.

Scaling is a math problem, not a confidence problem. You need three numbers locked in before you increase budget: cost per lead, cost per loan application, and cost per funded deal. Once those are stable and within par, roughly $55 per lead, $680 per application, $1,200 per funded loan, scaling becomes a matter of sustaining operations while removing the emotional resistance to higher ad spend. Most high-performing individual loan officers top out around $15,000 a month in spend. Most lenders running team operations land in the $30,000 to $60,000 a month range. The ceiling is determined by your operational capacity, not the platform.

Yes. That's a non-negotiable part of how I build. Your ad account, your pixels, your first-party data, your consent records, your landing pages. Nothing lives in a proprietary platform that disappears when we stop working together. The infrastructure compounds after we're done. That's the point.

One-to-one consent is now the compliance standard. Most aggregators are operating under shared consent models that are legally gray and deteriorating fast. A lot of them are pushing compliance risk downstream through indemnification agreements buried in their contracts. The lenders who are winning right now are the ones who stopped renting someone else's audience and started building their own. That's what this system does.

I run a short qualification check first, your production history, product focus, comp structure, and how your operations function. If there's clear misalignment, I'll tell you directly and explain why. If you're a fit, we walk through the actual lead data in a spreadsheet, review how the campaigns are structured, and talk through the economics specific to your product and market. At the end I introduce you to references, real clients who will give you direct feedback. Then you decide.

Yes. After the qualifying call confirms mutual fit, I make direct introductions. Names, emails, and phone numbers. These are active lenders and loan officers who will tell you exactly what working with me is like, including what didn't go perfectly. I have no interest in closing clients who aren't a genuine fit for the program.

Because I've seen exactly how this fails when the wrong operator is in the seat. Weak contact rates, no follow-up discipline, comp that can't support acquisition cost, ops that break under volume. Scaling traffic into that environment just produces bigger, faster losses. I take on a small number of clients at a time and I stay close to every account. That only works if the clients qualify.

Because this is a statistics game. Every dollar you spend is buying units of exposure in exchange for opportunities to close loans. Impressions lead to clicks. Clicks lead to form fills. Form fills lead to conversations. Conversations lead to applications. Applications lead to funded deals. That chain has known conversion rates at every stage, and those rates are not negotiable. They are what they are across thousands of accounts and millions of dollars in spend. When you try to run this program on less than $8,500 a month, you are effectively making a bet that you can outperform the known statistics of this industry at below-market volume. You are saying your contact rate, your conversion rate, your follow-up discipline, and your closing ability are good enough to beat the top 1 to 3 percent of performers in non-QM and private lending on a fraction of the budget. That is almost never true. Below the minimum, there simply isn't enough volume moving through the system to generate reliable data, optimize campaigns, or produce consistent funded deal flow. You end up making decisions based on thin sample sizes, cutting campaigns that would have worked, and scaling ones that won't. The math breaks down and you blame the leads. The $8,500 floor is not arbitrary. It is the minimum threshold at which the statistics start working in your favor instead of against you. It is the point at which you have enough exposure moving through the funnel to measure what's actually happening and make real decisions about where to scale. Below it, you are not running a demand generation program. You are running an experiment with your own money and calling it a strategy.